Was Paul Really A False Apostle?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
May 3, 2013
8,719
75
0
#61
I accepted Messiah when I was in my early teens, and I was then in evangelical Christianity. What part of this is not credible?
Isn´t it said Paul spent 14 years somewhow I DON´T KNOW?

Then no one can be forced to believe what other´s believed, except Paul´s... :confused:
 
Aug 17, 2013
96
0
0
#62
So then yes with commentaries? I just want to know where you get your information exactly....what commentators?
I have no single commentator I can identify as the source of my beliefs. I read many, many books and articles and listen to many , as I'm sure everyone here does. They have all moulded my beliefs in some way.
 
Last edited:
Jan 13, 2014
960
16
0
#63
Paul was an apostle of Jesus. The NAzi religion invented the fact that Paul was a false apostle. There are a lot of NAzis in AMerica still. So yo still hear this lie.
 

crossnote

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2012
30,742
3,670
113
#65
Paul was an apostle of Jesus. The NAzi religion invented the fact that Paul was a false apostle. There are a lot of NAzis in AMerica still. So yo still hear this lie.
It may be true the Nazis declared Paul a false apostle but they didn't invent that false idea. There were many Judaizers in Paul's day making that false assertion as there are today.
 
Aug 17, 2013
96
0
0
#66
There were many Judaizers in Paul's day making that false assertion as there are today.
Who invented the concept of the "Judaizer"? And, what is your definition of "Judaizer"?
 
Last edited:
N

nathan3

Guest
#67
I really hope for the threads here, people would cover scriptures, as is done in my original post. There is no scripture covered by any of the posts that followed from everyone .
 
N

nathan3

Guest
#68
just a whole lot of non-sense. It's a shame that some so-called Christians ,are reduced to attacking the very scriptures that teach their faith. Teach Christ. I encourage people to study the scripture covered in the video study of the first Post.
 
Last edited:

JaumeJ

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2011
21,363
6,652
113
#69
I will not watch an hour video on a subject that was very recently discussed to death. Maybe someone who has watched this person's video will tell me, if he used scripture to support Paul being an apostle, what scripture.

I am neither against nor for Paul. I read him always, but my Teacher is Yeshua. Since his writings are mostly to specific congregations or assemblies with specific questions and problems, I look to his writings for what has already been taught by the evangelists and prophets. Then Paul tends to make more sense. Meanwhile, I don't thing anyone may be faulted for listening to Jesus, Yeshua, first I mean, that would be just stupid.
 
N

nathan3

Guest
#71
Paul taught against' the traditions of the Pharisees. You missed that scripture, or are intentionally ignoring it.

Remember, they wanted people to circumcises and Paul was against that ( Acts 15 ).

If you had listened to lies for 3 years, Then naturally your going to believe that lie as truth. After all you invested all that time now you would feel disappointed to learn its all non-sense. But I'm sorry that is what it was, non sense.

Paul gave his life teaching Christ. Paul did not proclaim himself anything other then what he was sent to do.

Paul's difficult to understand writings, would be difficult to people who are Not familiar with scriptures. Paul taught about the three earth ages( which Peter also taught. )

, as God's words teach. Paul taught about the Antichrist, as God's words teach, Paul taught about the change in bodies, as God's words teach,.

Naturally if you where not familiar with God's words overall, then you would not understand the depth Paul went into these subjects.

And it would be your down fall especially to out right reject God's words, of which Paul taught.
 
Last edited:
C

chubbena

Guest
#72
The issue regarding Paul has been my main subject of Bible study for the past three years.

Paul claimed to be a Pharisee (Acts 23:6, Phil 3:5) - well into his 'Christian ministry'. Messiah commanded me to avoid the teachings of the anti-Law Pharisees (Mt 16:6-12).

As for what Peter wrote in 2Peter, I believe it was a warning, not a commendation. I believe Peter was warning against reading Paul's difficult-to-understand writings by the untaught and unstable (2Pet 3:16), led to their own destruction as a result of being led away by the delusion of lawless teachings (2Pet 3:17). Finally, note that Peter does not call Paul a fellow 'apostle', but only a 'brother'. Perhaps Peter had in mind the command Messiah gave him in Mt 13:30.

(I am here to have a reasoned conversation with friendly debaters: No need to shout in an attempt to make your point.)
I gave it a "like" because we might get to know how much we actually know about the Bible through the discussions.
 
Aug 17, 2013
96
0
0
#73
Paul taught against' the traditions of the Pharisees. You missed that scripture, or are intentionally ignoring it.

Remember, they wanted people to circumcises and Paul was against that ( Acts 15 ).
Do you believe every Pharisee agreed on every issue? Whether or not they agreed is not the issue. The issue is that he declared himself to be a Pharisee, and Messiah clearly commanded us to avoid the teachings of the Pharisees. How do you reconcile Messiah's command?

If you had listened to lies for 3 years, Then naturally your going to believe that lie as truth. After all you invested all that time now you would feel disappointed to learn its all non-sense. But I'm sorry that is what it was, non sense.
I have been in the pro-Pauline camp for 7+ years, and spent 3 years researching the non-Pauline argument. I pray that everyone could do the same - to truly examine both sides of the story - before coming to a final conclusion that would affect their eternal salvation.

Paul gave his life teaching Christ. Paul did not proclaim himself anything other then what he was sent to do.
I believe Paul taught a foreign non-obedience-required "Christ", contrary to what Messiah required of His disciples in the gospels.

And it would be your down fall especially to out right reject God's words, of which Paul taught.
It would also be to one's downfall to accept the word of a false prophet, no?
 
Aug 17, 2013
96
0
0
#74
I gave it a "like" because we might get to know how much we actually know about the Bible through the discussions.
Thank you. You're welcome to share your thoughts on the subject, brother.
 
N

nathan3

Guest
#75
Do you believe every Pharisee agreed on every issue? Whether or not they agreed is not the issue. The issue is that he declared himself to be a Pharisee, and Messiah clearly commanded us to avoid the teachings of the Pharisees. How do you reconcile Messiah's command?

I have been in the pro-Pauline camp for 7+ years, and spent 3 years researching the non-Pauline argument. I pray that everyone could do the same - to truly examine both sides of the story - before coming to a final conclusion that would affect their eternal salvation.

I believe Paul taught a foreign non-obedience-required "Christ", contrary to what Messiah required of His disciples in the gospels.

It would also be to one's downfall to accept the word of a false prophet, no?

Your narrowing your view to a few scriptures, and not pulling back to see the full picture. Paul was just telling his story, and Paul always taught Christ.

Remember, you either believe John 3:16 or not. Paul was well in his right to convert, and he not only converted he was chosen, by God.
As its written. Now either God is in control of His own written word, or not.
 
Aug 17, 2013
96
0
0
#76
Your narrowing your view to a few scriptures, and not pulling back to see the full picture.
As I said, I've spent years studying both sides of the story with great turmoil, delving into the original languages to discover the truth ... so I believe I do have a sense of the "full picture". No offense meant, but have you done the same, my friend?

Paul was just telling His story, Remember, you either believe John 3:16 or not.
How does John 3:16 relate to the lawless message of the Pharisees?

Paul was well in his write to convert, and he not only converted he was chosen by God. as its written. Now either God is in control of His own words or not.
Was YHVH in control when He placed the 2 trees in the Garden? Was He in control when He chose Judas to be among His inner group?

Do you believe Deuteronomy 13:1-5 when it states that YHVH sends false prophets to His people to test their love for Him and obedience to His Word?
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
#77
Is the Apostle Paul a false apostle... this is the kind of garbage that comes up when almost everyone believes the inerrant word of God doesn't exist. I'm glad I can put 100% faith in the KJV!
 
N

nathan3

Guest
#78
As I said, I've spent years studying both sides of the story with great turmoil, delving into the original languages to discover the truth ... so I believe I do have a sense of the "full picture". No offense meant, but have you done the same, my friend?

How does John 3:16 relate to the lawless message of the Pharisees?

Was YHVH in control when He placed the 2 trees in the Garden? Was He in control when He chose Judas to be among His inner group?

Do you believe Deuteronomy 13:1-5 when it states that YHVH sends false prophets to His people to test their love for Him and obedience to His Word?


Maybe you never read about a Prophet , a man of God, that God used ? ( 1 Kings 13 ).

How God gave the message to this king and sent this man of God. God gave this prophet strict orders, and the man of God, who God chose, did as instructed, Until, an old prophet, lied to him, claiming to have a message from an angle to him, saying to stay with him, and eat.

God told the man of God, to not eat, not stop, and not turn aside.


Even though this man was even tricked, God sent a lion, and killed the man of God, because he did Not follow God's words. Yet allowed man to deceive him . God still held him accountable.


Do you think, God is not capable, of killing Paul, and preventing his writings to enter His authored written Word, if he was not obeying His words ?

Do you think God just changed His mind, and abandoned his words ?
 
Aug 17, 2013
96
0
0
#79
Is the Apostle Paul a false apostle... this is the kind of garbage that comes up when almost everyone believes the inerrant word of God doesn't exist. I'm glad I can put 100% faith in the KJV!
What did Messiah identify as Scripture? What makes the KJV superior? Do you read the original KJV with the apocrypha? Why or why not? Is the KJV more inerrant than the original language texts? Which texts?
 
Aug 17, 2013
96
0
0
#80
Maybe you never read about a Prophet , a man of God, that God used ? ( 1 Kings 13 ).

How God gave the message to this king and sent this man of God. God gave this prophet strict orders, and the man of God, who God chose, did as instructed, Until, an old prophet, lied to him, claiming to have a message from an angle to him, saying to stay with him, and eat.

God told the man of God, to not eat, not stop, and not turn aside.


Even though this man was even tricked, God sent a lion, and killed the man of God, because he did Not follow God's words. Yet allowed man to deceive him . God still held him accountable.


Do you think, God is not capable, of killing Paul, and preventing his writings to enter His authored written Word, if he was not obeying His words ?

Do you think God just changed His mind, and abandoned his words ?
Absolutely, I believe it is possible for YHVH to kill someone for not obeying Him. What makes - if I may assume - your Protestant canon "His authored written Word" though? Why not the Catholic canon? Or the Orthodox canon? Or the Ethiopian Orthodox canon? Or Luther's canon? Or my non-Pauline canon?